Baileys 2-20-14 v Dan Smith

Below are selected blunders from our club's weekly tournament.  I hope to record matches on a more frequent basis and analyze them here.
 

is Dan Smith score: 0 pip: 155

7 point match

pip: 164 score: 0 is Bill

XGID=----bAD-C--AeD---a-eb---B-:0:0:1:21:0:0:0:7:10

to play 21

1.	XG Roller++	24/22 6/5	eq: -0.135
	Player: Opponent: 47.76% (G:9.17% B:0.34%) 52.24% (G:13.97% B:0.45%)
2.	XG Roller++	13/11 6/5	eq: -0.229 (-0.094)
	Player: Opponent: 46.00% (G:8.40% B:0.31%) 54.00% (G:16.05% B:0.54%)
3.	3-ply	11/9 6/5	eq: -0.237 (-0.102)
	Player: Opponent: 45.26% (G:8.69% B:0.30%) 54.74% (G:15.92% B:0.70%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I played 13/11, 6/5 making two points and keeping my back men frozen. This turns out to be a whopper sized error, with the computer preferring 24/22, 6/5.

Here is what I was thinking at the time. Dan has a blitzing formation rather than a priming formation so I don't need to split. By splitting I am just encouraging him to unload those stacks on my head. Also, 13/11 establishes a new point. It eliminates the joker seven.

Perhaps these are the more relevant thinking points (though I admit I am confused on this one)...

Opponent has an anchor and I don't --> argues for spitting

Opponent only has two point board and eight in the zone so attack isn't likely to be too dangerous --> argues for splitting

Opponent's next play is likely to come down from the midpoint... splitting provides more coverage of the oufield --> argues for splitting

The 11 point, while an asset, can never be part of the same prime (since 11 and 5 point are six apart)


******************


Later in the same game Dan cubes. Take or Drop?

is Dan Smith score: 0 pip: 100

7 point match

pip: 131 score: 0 is Bill

XGID=--B-bBC-BB---BA--a-dc-bbaA:0:0:-1:00:0:0:0:7:10

on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in XG Roller++	No double	Double/Take
Player Winning Chances:	65.32% (G:41.29% B:0.48%)	65.38% (G:42.02% B:0.51%)
Opponent Winning Chances:	34.68% (G:7.46% B:0.37%)	34.62% (G:7.43% B:0.38%)
Cubeless Equities	+0.652	+1.374
Cubeful Equities
No double:	+0.706 (-0.294)
Double/Take:	+1.109 (+0.109)
Double/Pass:	+1.000
Best Cube action: Double / Pass

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

If Dan doesn't cover and I hit, or if he does cover and I simply enter I am right back in this game. I have a strong offensive position and can win a lot. So I took. I underestimated the gammon losses - which are a staggering 41%. I guess when I lose most of the time I am closed out and in big trouble. In particular, the loose blot in the outfield makes a big difference. Pick up this blot and now the position is a comfortable take.

Something I have been trying to do lately is look at the winning chances in the position. Here they are 65/35% with huge gammons. I am hoping that taking the time to notice this will gradually sink into my brain what a 60/40% position looks like versus 65/35% or 70/30% etc. This knowledge would obviously help evaluate cube decisions over the board if one were able to attain it.

**************


Next game I lead 5 away 7 away and Dan doubles. Take or Drop?

is Dan Smith score: 0 pip: 160

7 point match

pip: 164 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=----abEaD---bD--ac-c---b-B:0:0:-1:00:2:0:0:7:10

on roll, cube action?

Analyzed in XG Roller++	No double	Double/Take
Player Winning Chances:	63.81% (G:27.80% B:0.77%)	63.77% (G:28.20% B:0.81%)
Opponent Winning Chances:	36.19% (G:7.01% B:0.27%)	36.23% (G:7.18% B:0.31%)
Cubeless Equities	+0.493	+1.060
Cubeful Equities
No double:	+0.800 (-0.101)
Double/Take:	+0.901
Double/Pass:	+1.000 (+0.099)
Best Cube action: Double / Take

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

My thinking. This looks scary. nine in the zone. 2 on the bar, and Dan (while he has four back) they are not far back plus I have achieve nothing on the offensive side of the board. Also I have a lead which would tilt a bit towards being cautious. I dropped.

The computer shows this is a take. As far the numbers it is roughly a 65/35 position with 20% net gammons so this works out to a grin and bear it take.

As far as trying to reason through it, let's check Stick's relevant blitzing guidelines.

The race: I am down but it's not overwhelming. This is due to the unusual four men back. Race isn't ussually a big factor in blitz but it is worth noting that if I establish an anchor the race isn't out of the question.

Points Made:

Rule of thumb -- most 2 point boards are takes
-- 3 points or stronger are very dangerous

Here it is a two point board which points towards a take. Another slight factor may be that Dan has the 2 point and not the better 3 point. Meaning Dan is less likely to prime me; it's pretty much blitz or bust.

Rule of thumb -- number of men in the zone

Less than 10 men generally a take
More than 10 men generally a drop
Exactly 10 men it depends on other factors in the exact position

So Dan has nine men which would point towards a take.

Diversification & Efficiency of men in zone

Dan's distro is decent (men spread on three points and not overly stacked) but he has the inferior two point.


Offensive progress:

None. This is very bad for me and points towards a drop. I probably overemphasized this factor.


So add this all up and I guess the general factors point towards a take. In particular the 2 point board and nine in the zone and four men back all point towards take while no offensive progress and match lead point towards drop. All in all I guess a close take, which it apparently is.

Here is one last interesting measure to keep in mind. A friend gave me this one. He says take pip count of the blitzers front 12 men minus 42. 42 pips being a closed board. This is a rough estimate of how many rolls you have to make an anchor.

So here Dan has 99 pips with his front 12 men less 42 pips for a closed board or 57 pips. If you dive by 8 pips for an average roll then I have about 8 rolls to make an anchor before I get closed out (and that assumes Dan rolls perfect to make the offensive points). I am not sure what this really means, but I guess it is some sort of indication that I have a decent chance of surviving this blitz.

Finally here is one last rule of thumb on blitzes from Stick.

He writes most early game blitzes that are Double / Takes are about 65-68% wins with about 25-28% gammons for the stronger side. Here the breakdown is 64% wins and 27% gammons and the position is indeed a take. not that I would know this OTB as far as making an estimate, but geez this Stick guy is good!


***************

I lead 5 away 6 away and have 53 to play.

is Dan Smith score: 1 pip: 183

7 point match

pip: 166 score: 2 is Bill

XGID=-a--abE-C---dD---cAbbB----:0:0:1:53:2:1:0:7:10

to play 53

1.	XG Roller++	21/18 13/8	eq: -0.095
	Player: Opponent: 49.97% (G:11.58% B:0.36%) 50.03% (G:13.67% B:0.46%)
2.	XG Roller++	21/18 21/16	eq: -0.106 (-0.011)
	Player: Opponent: 49.99% (G:10.58% B:0.31%) 50.01% (G:13.79% B:0.45%)
3.	XG Roller++	8/3 6/3	eq: -0.239 (-0.145)
	Player: Opponent: 45.17% (G:11.25% B:0.37%) 54.83% (G:12.60% B:0.48%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

I made the 3 point with 8/3, 6/3. I figured this is going to be a long game and making an offensive point, or at least some kind of asset was important.

The computer prefers making the bar with 21/18 and then either 21/16 or 13/8. I have a hard time understanding this one. The best I can come up with is that by making the bar point I will never be primed. Also I am up in the race so moving the back men makes gameplan sense. Also Dan only has seven offensive checkers so I am hardly in any immediate danger. Perhaps another reason is that the 3 point, while an asset is not ideal. I would prefer to make points in front of Dan, or if I must make an inner point the 4 point is better.

This is another position I don't understand so I am really just guessing as to the reasons.


******************

I lead 3 away 6 away and have 54 to play.

is Dan Smith score: 1 pip: 148

7 point match

pip: 153 score: 4 is Bill

XGID=-b--B-D-C-A-bC-a-bbdb---B-:0:0:1:54:4:1:0:7:10

to play 54

1.	XG Roller++	13/9 10/5	eq: -0.900
	Player: Opponent: 36.04% (G:11.40% B:0.75%) 63.96% (G:22.36% B:1.92%)
2.	XG Roller++	13/4	eq: -1.000 (-0.100)
	Player: Opponent: 32.30% (G:9.83% B:0.52%) 67.70% (G:20.93% B:1.34%)
3.	3-ply	10/5 8/4	eq: -0.992 (-0.092)
	Player: Opponent: 33.74% (G:9.73% B:0.53%) 66.26% (G:21.93% B:1.69%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

First off I know I am getting cubed so is there any play I can make where I can take?

Also related is one play less likely to get cubed?


The answer to both questions points to 13/9, 10/5.

My position is fairly desperate so I need to take desperate measures to build an offense before it's too late. Slotting fills the bill. Now if Dan misses I will likely make the 5 point myself when I am right back in the game. Also there is some four duplication going on. 64, 42, 44 are all good rolls anyway.

Instead I made the hopeless 13/4 which duplicates my own numbers. I have ones and threes everywhere to make an offensive point while I also need threes and ones to split on the defensive side of the board. All in all a very poor play.

After this whopper my position is so bad I am supposed to drop! I took and ended up getting gammoned.

*******************


Later in the same game and I have a 51 to play. Your move?

is Dan Smith score: 1 pip: 132

7 point match

pip: 111 score: 4 is Bill

XGID=-BBBBcC-A-a------Acbbbb-B-:1:1:1:51:4:1:0:7:10

to play 51

1.	XG Roller++	24/23 8/3	eq: -0.985
	Player: Opponent: 16.46% (G:4.21% B:0.05%) 83.54% (G:29.52% B:1.53%)
2.	XG Roller++	8/2	eq: -1.115 (-0.131)
	Player: Opponent: 9.99% (G:1.71% B:0.02%) 90.01% (G:28.14% B:1.39%)
3.	2-ply	17/16 8/3	eq: -1.139 (-0.154)
	Player: Opponent: 9.01% (G:1.41% B:0.02%) 90.99% (G:28.22% B:1.39%)

eXtreme Gammon Version: 2.10, MET: Kazaross XG2

Here I had mentally given up and was in "gammon save mode." I rather quickly played 8/2 safetying one block and holding the ace point. Again my hope is only leave the ace point as Dan is bearing off and run off the gammon.

However I can and should play the brave 24/23, 8/3. You can see from the numbers that this play wins a full 6% more while the gammon rate is only 1% more. A tough play to make over the board but this didn't even cross my radar. I suppose the lesson is to always conside the "DMP" play (the one which wins the most gammons be damned). Then make it unless you can see a good reason not too. In this case, getting gammoned is a great reason not to give up the anchor, except that it turns out you get gammoned much more...